2. Summary
----------

Right now IPv6 addresses are being allocated to individual organizations
in different economies by APNIC within a certain policy framework, which
was developed in the IPv4 era. But there are certain concerns with the
above APNIC policy -

(a) Contiguous address block allocation is not ensured by APNIC when
an organization goes back to APNIC for further allocation
(reapplying after more than one year)

I support addressing this potential problem -- e.g. through propositions 98 or 99.

(b) Non provision of address space for future organizations in
economies who are not in a position (or not aware) to ask for
addresses at present.

I think it is too hard to judge accurately enough the needs of future organisations

and that the potential benefits are outweighed by the disadvantages.

4. Details
----------

In the current policy framework of APNIC, addresses are allocated to
different organizations in different economies when they are able to
demonstrate their need for those addresses and they apply for them.
However, in this process two requirements, mentioned in summary above,
are not taken into consideration. In the era of IPv4, when the addresses
were in severe shortage, such a demonstrated need policy was relevant
but in the era of IPv6 it is not.

Here is a major decision point!

IPv6 addresses are in abundance and their planning and distribution is
also at a very nascent stage. The main objective of this proposal is to
ensure that all economies (and the different present and future
organizations in those economies) can ensure they will get a suitable
share of the IPv6 address space, in one or more large contiguous blocks,
whether they need it now or at a later date. This will also help
different organizations in different economies to plan their networks in
a more effective manner as they will have a reasonably fair idea of the
IPv6 address space allocation in future.

You propose to change from needs-based allocation, to estimation of potential future need.

And once you have an allocation, make a plan to use it all up!

[ I have seen a scheme like this go bad previously. ]

Say a large block is reserved, and sparse allocations are made within it to allow for maximal contiguous growth.

This will go one of two ways:

a) more demand in this economy than the average, and each organisation's allocation will have less room for contiguous growth.

b) less demand in this economy than the average, and unused address space is locked up not available to other economies.

5. Pros/Cons
------------

Advantages:

1. The various IPv6 awareness programmes for different economies, the
various studies for estimation of needs of different economies and
management of the reserved IPv6 blocks as mentioned above will no
doubt increase the job of APNIC in the immediate future, but over a
long period of time, this would prove to be very beneficial for IPv6
deployment and also make the job of APNIC easier since APNIC would be
very clear on what future allocations it can make.

I am fully supportive of awareness programmes.

2. The economies and their organizations will also benefit since they
will have a fair idea of what they will get in future and they can
plan accordingly for the long term for IPv6 deployment.

No. This is an illusion.

Organisations should plan around what they need for the (near) future,

not what some APNIC or RIR planning body chose for them some time in the past.

Disadvantages:

1. There may be short term workload/financial implications for APNIC
for analysis and projection studies, training and awareness etc.
These however, should not be a constraint because otherwise also
APNIC has to work for IPv6 awareness and its deployment in all economies
in APNIC region.

I think there should be more disadvantages listed here ...

6. Effect on APNIC
------------------

1. It would prove to be very beneficial for IPv6 deployment and also
make the job of APNIC easier since APNIC would be very clear on what
future allocations it can make.

What did you mean here?

a) APNIC can say "don't ask us, ask you NIR"?

b) APNIC can say "you can't have a /28, your NIR only wants you to have a /32"?

2. Address allocation will be more organized and orderly.

7. Effect on NIRs
-----------------

NIRs can allocate IP addresses to individual members in its geographical
area from the reserved blocks as per the actual projections of
individual members.

If/when they have actual projections, they can apply direct to APNIC.

====

PS. I don't think you have enough time for this policy to help you achieve your December 2011 or March 2012 deadlines.

ISPs have 13 weeks. Say 2 weeks for ISPs to decide what to buy, 6 weeks for delivery, then 5 weeks to run a test lab / learn IPv6 wrinkles / deploy / train engineers and helpdesk / addressing plan / back-end systems etc. Whew!!

It takes time to make APNIC policy changes, time for the awareness / analysis / projection of requirements stage, time to decide how to subdivide a big address block etc. My guess is these extra steps will take an extra 6 to 12 months.

John